WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. -- Thousands of people have taken to their computers and phones in rage after The Journal News posted an online database of local gun-permit holders.

The database, legally obtained from the County Clerks' Offices through a Freedom of Information Act request made after the shootings in Sandy Hook, Conn., that left 20 children and eight adults dead, has been called irresponsible, dangerous and leaning toward intimidation by online pundits.

Social media played a big part in the exponential spread of the story, whose map has been recommended more than 20,000 times. Two Facebo

Numerous additional comments relating to the gun-permit map have appeared on posts in other unrelated articles. More than a dozen more people sent private messages via Facebook objecting to the map. The overwhelming majority of comments strongly object to the article.ok posts linking to the article on Sunday garnered 346 comments as of Tuesday evening. That's in addition to 167 comments posted directly to Facebook.com/LoHud since the article was published.

The database also was mentioned in the Drudge Report, Memorandum.com, Breitbart.com, Thegatewaypundit.com, Instapundit, iOwnTheWorld.com and UrbanGrounds, along with Yahoo, ABC News and Fox News, among others.

More than 500 comments -- on both sides of the debate -- accompanied an article on CNN.com Tuesday.

The Journal News is owned by Gannett Co. Inc., which is also the parent company of USA TODAY.

Hundreds of callers have complained, claiming publication of the database put their safety at risk or violated their privacy. Others claimed publication was illegal. Many of the callers were vitriolic and some threatened members of the newspaper staff.

"New York residents have the right to own guns with a permit and they also have a right to access public information," said Janet Hasson, president and publisher of The Journal News Media Group.

Robert Freeman, executive director of the state Committee on Open Government and an expert in the state's Freedom of Information law, has said all government records and data are presumed public unless a specific statute bars their release. Names and addresses are specifically deemed public records, he said.

This is not the first time The Journal News has been criticized for publishing information about gun permits. A similar article in 2006 received similar responses, although social media did not play as large a part in the spread of the article or of the complaints.

"We knew publication of the database would be controversial, but we felt sharing as much information as we could about gun ownership in our area was important in the aftermath of the Newtown shootings," said CynDee Royle, editor and vice president/news.

"People are concerned about who owns guns and how many of them there are in their neighborhoods," she said. "Our Freedom of Information request also sought specifics on how many and what types of weapons people owned. That portion of the request was denied."

Scott F. Williams, 41, of Haddon Heights, N.J., who served in the Marines as a rifleman, was one of the very few callers who agreed to identify themselves and comment on why they called.

"This is what I see," he said. "It's all in the context of the shootings in Newtown ... it gets us all talking about gun control. That people are at a heightened concern makes sense to me. I am a gun owner and a pro-Second-Amendment (person). I try to be rational." He called the newspaper's decision to link to the database "highly Orwellian."

"The implications are mind-boggling," he said. "It's as if gun owners are sex offenders (and) to own a handgun risks exposure as if one is a sex offender. It's, in my mind, crazy."

*****

Welcome to the Peoples Republik of New York, kids. Frankly, I don't know what's worse - the fact that this ****ing liberal rag actually did this, or the fact that some dumbass government official felt it was appropriate to release the information. Outing law abiding citizens guilty of nothing but exercising their constitutional rights - what a disgusting, despicable, dangerous abuse of power and betrayal of the public trust. Sane people don't advertise to their neighbors that they own guns - they don't flash them in the window, they don't have GUNS HERE INQUIRE WITHIN signs in their yards. Just like conceal carry, anonymity is important here. Now any punk who clicks on this site will know where they can go steal a gun. It essentially rings the dinner bell for them - just find a remote house on this list, and if nobody's home, break in and start looking. I guess if these gun owners didn't have alarm systems before, they'd better get one now. And so much for leaving your pistol in the nightstand - now you'll need an expensive safe. Thank God most thieving scumbags who'd steal guns don't read the news (or anything else), but surely somebody's going to take advantage of this, and when it happens, I sure as hell hope these ****ing vermin are held accountable for their irresponsible actions.

If my name and address was on this list..... well, my reaction sure as **** wouldn't be a sternly-worded e-mail.

But of course, these vile twats will hide behind the First Amendment. Gotta love people shitting on Constitution and then hiding behind it when the outrage hits.

And that idiot Direckshun had the balls to complain about the money the NRA raises, when the opposition has the ability to pull crap like this.

The New York newspaper that drew criticism for publishing the names and addresses of hundreds of legal gun permit holders is doubling down by publishing the personal information of even more law-abiding gun owners.

To great criticism, the Journal News published an interactive map showing the names and addresses of the legal gun owners in Westchester and Rockland counties just before Christmas.

Now the paper has announced it will next publish the names and addresses of permit-holders in Putnam County with an eye toward eventually politicizing the names and addresses of every gun owner in the state.

The Journal News has defended its controversial violation of the privacy of New York's legal gun owners by claiming that since the records are open to the public to find in government archives, they should be allowed to publish all the names and addresses.

New York State Senator Greg Ball slammed the Journal News, saying that the paper is treating law-abiding citizens like "sex offenders."

“The asinine editors at The Journal News, have once again gone out of their way to place a virtual scarlet letter on law abiding firearm owners throughout the region. The immediate elimination of the information posted on the Journal News Website is the only way we can ensure the safety and liberty of these New Yorkers,” said Mr. Ball in a statement. “This is clearly a violation of privacy, and needs to be corrected immediately. The same elitist egg heads who use their editorial page to coddle terrorists and criminals are now treating law abiding citizens like level three sexual predators.”

Others have said that the paper has put the lives of the state's gun owners in danger by giving criminals a virtual map to their homes.

Several laws are being prepared in the state capital in Albany to make the names and addresses of the Empire State's gun owners private.

Al Tompkins of the Florida-based Poynter Institute criticized his fellow journalists in New York for the publication of the gun owners' names, worrying that this abuse of government open records would end up hurting the standing of open records laws with voters and politicians alike.

"I suspected that legislative backlash might follow, and it would be a worse mistake than publishing the data," Tompkins said of the possible harm to such laws.

A similar situation threatened in Illinois in 2011. The Associated Press had asked anti-Second Amendment State Attorney General Lisa Madigan if it could publish the names and addresses of registered gun owners in Illinois; she agreed and ordered the state police to turn over the records. But the police refused to do so and pleaded with the state legislature to craft some legislation so that they wouldn't have to.

Illinois State Senator Kirk Dillard obliged, and a law was quickly written and passed to prevent the state from publicizing the names and address of Illinois gun owners. Even Illinois' anti-gun governor saw the sense and political need to sing the bill.

Florida and Tennessee also protect the personal information of registered gun owners.

__________________"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Except it shows by process of elimination who doesn't have a gun permit inviting criminals to make them targets. It's almost like the left wants another shooting so they can create a crisis to ban more guns. Way to go, Gorilla.

This is what's wrong with requiring a permit. It reduces privacy.

Then blame the law, not the newspaper. Nothing the newspaper published was biased, slanted or un-true. They published factual information that they felt the public might want to know that was perfectly legal for them to acquire.

Then blame the law, not the newspaper. Nothing the newspaper published was biased, slanted or un-true. They published factual information that they felt the public might want to know that was perfectly legal for them to acquire.

I blame the newspaper for lack of good judgment and being irresponsible...and THAT is who I will blame. It is the name of the thread topic.

Then blame the law, not the newspaper. Nothing the newspaper published was biased, slanted or un-true. They published factual information that they felt the public might want to know that was perfectly legal for them to acquire.

Are you ****ing kidding me? Gun-hating rag of a newspaper operating hand-in-hand with citizen-hating government, and you truly see no problem with it?

What happens when somebody breaks into one of these identified houses, steals a gun, and then uses it to kill somebody? What if somebody on this list is denied employment because some liberal idiot just assumes they're dangerous because they legally own a gun?

These vermin painted targets on these peoples' backs. Period. As bad as Illinois is when it comes to guns, at least they drew the line at this bullshit.

Being for some gun restrictions = treason
Newspaper printing public information = treason

We have gun control by state. We don't need more, save some technology to prevent someone's weapons getting into the hands of others who shouldn't or who don't have permits.

Quote:

/RWNJ

More ad hominems—your specialty.

Funny how we don't call some mild restrictions on speech* "speech control" or barring religion from public places "faith control." But on guns...it gets called "control." If it sounds like fascism, smells like fascism...then it is fascism.

Are you ****ing kidding me? Gun-hating rag of a newspaper operating hand-in-hand with citizen-hating government, and you truly see no problem with it?

What happens when somebody breaks into one of these identified houses, steals a gun, and then uses it to kill somebody? What if somebody on this list is denied employment because some liberal idiot just assumes they're dangerous because they legally own a gun?

These vermin painted targets on these peoples' backs. Period. As bad as Illinois is when it comes to guns, at least they drew the line at this bullshit.

Are you ****ing kidding me? Gun-hating rag of a newspaper operating hand-in-hand with citizen-hating government, and you truly see no problem with it?

What happens when somebody breaks into one of these identified houses, steals a gun, and then uses it to kill somebody? What if somebody on this list is denied employment because some liberal idiot just assumes they're dangerous because they legally own a gun?

These vermin painted targets on these peoples' backs. Period. As bad as Illinois is when it comes to guns, at least they drew the line at this bullshit.

If these people got permits, then they agreed to have this information be made available publicly. Painted targets on these people's backs? If gun ownership is a 2nd amendment right, then why is having a gun permit a scarlet letter?

If this information is so dangerous to possess, then why is it publically available?

If these people got permits, then they agreed to have this information be made available publicly. Painted targets on these people's backs? If gun ownership is a 2nd amendment right, then why is having a gun permit a scarlet letter?

If this information is so dangerous to possess, then why is it publically available?

How many criminals do you think wander into a government office and ask to see official public records?

How many criminals do you think wander into a government office and ask to see official public records?

Are you really this ****ing stupid?

I'm stupid? I'm not the one arguing that people who have gotten gun permits for home protection are now in danger of being targeted for home invasion and thefts because people now know they have guns. What? If you have a gun for self protection, isn't it far more effective as a deterent than a surprise? That people might be denied employment because they have excercised their constitutional right to bear arms? What?

I'm stupid? I'm not the one arguing that people who have gotten gun permits for home protection are now in danger of being targeted for home invasion and thefts because people now know they have guns. What? If you have a gun for self protection, isn't it far more effective as a deterent than a surprise? That people might be denied employment because they have excercised their constitutional right to bear arms? What?

Are you really this ****ing stupid to argue this? Its nonsensical.

Those of us who aren't on ****ing welfare leave our homes occasionally - you know, jobs and such. When that happens, and nobody's home, well, a smart person could figure it out. I guess I'll write it off as one of life's great mysteries for you.